Nvidia Corp., the world’s largest designer of discrete graphics processing units (GPUs), reportedly plans to update its lineup of expensive graphics cards with at least two new offerings later in the quarter. The most powerful of the novelties will carry two graphics chips, whereas another will feature single-chip designs.
The new top-of-the-range graphics card by Nvidia is called GeForce 9800 GX2 which is based on two yet unknown 65nm graphics chips with 128 unified shader processors inside. The board, according to [H]ard|OCP web-site, will be 30% faster compared to Nvidia GeForce 8800 Ultra and will enable 4-way multi-GPU configurations. The novelty will have 256 stream processors in total, but will rely on driver support to demonstrate its potential, just like any multi-GPU solutions.
View: The full story @ Xbit-Labs
The new top-of-the-range graphics card by Nvidia is called GeForce 9800 GX2 which is based on two yet unknown 65nm graphics chips with 128 unified shader processors inside. The board, according to [H]ard|OCP web-site, will be 30% faster compared to Nvidia GeForce 8800 Ultra and will enable 4-way multi-GPU configurations. The novelty will have 256 stream processors in total, but will rely on driver support to demonstrate its potential, just like any multi-GPU solutions.
View: The full story @ Xbit-Labs
Hey even with SLI on two 8800's you don't get a 2x performance increast
Get ready for a whole slew of games I can't play.
http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=611171
if this POS is anything like the 7950GX2 I won't even touch it with a 10ft pole
looks awfully like dual G92 based 8800 GTS Chips, severely underclocked to keep the thermal enveloppe tight and lacking a lot of bandwidth, hence the meager 30% increase in performances over a single 8800 ultra
"a while" is no definite amount of time mind you... can be anything from minutes to days/months whatever
Surely 50% is more than reasonable to expect.
Either way, if the increase in power usage is greater than the increase in performance, then this thing won't be popular.
Surely 50% is more than reasonable to expect.
The Ultras for instance are what, a year old now? They weren't even that big a step up on the 8800GTX which could be overclocked to similar levels. For them to be releasing a card in February, over a year after the 8800GTX, which doesnt outperform it by a considerable margin is a complete failure and won't really be of benefit to anyone IMHO.
Considering this news isnt from NVidia themselves I'll wait and see, but I think consumers should really be expecting more considering how long this top line refresh has been in the making. If this is all they are going to offer then it doesn't bode well for those that thought the cards would be a good step up when it came to Crysis ect over previous gen cards. And Hard forums/OCP which they sourced said the next real gen cards wont be until mid year. Who is NVIdia trying to kid, the current cards are already struggling enough in many of todays titles (particularly at higher resolutions) let alone whatever comes out in the next 6 months.
Hopefully ATI has a card up it's sleave as NVidia really needs a wake up call. With the measly gains on 1+ year old hardware it honestly wouldnt suprise me if AMD could take the lead at some point this year if NVidias new line isnt due for six months.
Last edited by Smigit on 04 Jan 2008 - 16:06
The one reason I can think of for why they should release something even faster is for Crysis to perform decently at Very High without putting a hole in your wallet.
These are supposed to be the top end cards and are meant to be replacing the previous top end gen. Based on their intended market I would have assumed that the main market for a new NVidia top tier product would be the exact same consumers who likely have already bought a 8800GTX or 8800Ultra. Make no bones about it, those cards, as are these, will be aimed at the top end PC gamers. With no top end card in over a year and verging 18 months by the time these are out, think of how many consumers would love to have received a real power house card and would jump at the oppotunity to upgrade.
And to that end thats why NVidia has to do more. These performance jumps arent really all that enticing at all to owners of existing NVidia hardware so much so that I can forsee many just skipping the cards althoghether. Bare in mind an overclocked 8800GTX can get close to an Ultra...when you consider that the 8800GTX came out in 2006 it's insane to think that in 2008 they are releasing a card that is only 30% faster and that that new card achieves this because it is in SLI. AMD not being an option hasn't stopped and will not stop the need for more powerful cards.
To me it seems a complete waste of time if these prelimary estimates are anything to go by. They don't offer any reason for current 8800 card owners to upgrade and the average consumer is still probably better served by the 8800GT.
The other reason of course is that AMD could pull one and get the upper hand and considering how slow NVidia is progressing that isn't out of the picture entirely and they did it in the past with the 9700. To me this complacency reminds me alot of Intel a few years ago and in the end it resulted in AMD becoming the market leader performance wise for a few years to follow.
edit: sorry about all the slashes...for some reason the sites messing my formatting up when I use the edit function
Last edited by Smigit on 04 Jan 2008 - 17:30
These are supposed to be the top end cards and are meant to be replacing the previous top end gen. Based on their intended market I would have assumed that the main market for a new NVidia top tier product would be the exact same consumers who likely have already bought a 8800GTX or 8800Ultra. Make no bones about it, those cards, as are these, will be aimed at the top end PC gamers. With no top end card in over a year and verging 18 months by the time these are out, think of how many consumers would love to have received a real power house card and would jump at the oppotunity to upgrade.
And to that end thats why NVidia has to do more. These performance jumps arent really all that enticing at all to owners of existing NVidia hardware so much so that I can forsee many just skipping the cards althoghether. Bare in mind an overclocked 8800GTX can get close to an Ultra...when you consider that the 8800GTX came out in 2006 it's insane to think that in 2008 they are releasing a card that is only 30% faster and that that new card achieves this because it is in SLI. AMD not being an option hasn't stopped and will not stop the need for more powerful cards.
To me it seems a complete waste of time if these prelimary estimates are anything to go by. They don't offer any reason for current 8800 card owners to upgrade and the average consumer is still probably better served by the 8800GT.
The other reason of course is that AMD could pull one and get the upper hand and considering how slow NVidia is progressing that isn't out of the picture entirely and they did it in the past with the 9700. To me this complacency reminds me alot of Intel a few years ago and in the end it resulted in AMD becoming the market leader performance wise for a few years to follow.
edit: sorry about all the slashes...for some reason the sites messing my formatting up when I use the edit function
I agree with some parts and it makes sense that they compete with themselves, but because they only have to compete with themselves, they don't have to release hardware with much significant improvement. I know I am satisfied with my 8800GT and I hope to get a second one to help out with Crysis. But any other game, I have 0 difficulty playing them. Framerates are fantastic, and Crysis is the only one that's been able to go significantly below 60fps.
I think nVidia feels they can take their time because of the AMD/ATI merger, and I think thats affected how well AMD can put out new cards. We'll see though, I really hope AMD pulls through, I used to buy their parts and ATI's as well, but nVidia and Intel have been able to offer better bang for the buck for me, at least with my budget.
i seriously think that the video cards need a different direction than more expensive -> more expensive -> even more expensive , if the performance isnt being pushed so much anymore...perhaps it is time for everyone to have roughly the same specs, no more gtx ultra nonsense, and take pc gaming back above the consoles... otherwise, theres always the option of having like multi gpu where it is a much more valid way of getting performance than before, since your not gonna get faster cards anymore
Last edited by carmatic on 04 Jan 2008 - 16:02
In regards to card's not getting faster. Sure they will. Hell these cards will be faster than the 8800's just not enough to be really all that excited about after such a long wait in my oppinion. But cards are and will get faster. I also don't think they are really getting more expensive...for years I've seen the top end cards hovering at basically the same price bracket with there being cards alot cheaper for those that don't want the expensive option. It's only really getting more expensive IMHO if you start going SLI and the like.
i seriously think that the video cards need a different direction than more expensive -> more expensive -> even more expensive , if the performance isnt being pushed so much anymore...perhaps it is time for everyone to have roughly the same specs, no more gtx ultra nonsense, and take pc gaming back above the consoles... otherwise, theres always the option of having like multi gpu where it is a much more valid way of getting performance than before, since your not gonna get faster cards anymore
See if they do that, they lose sales. The whole point of releasing faster/more expensive and slower/more affordable is so that they can reach all corners of the market. In fact most of their money is made from the low end cards. 95% of people don't even know the difference, they just see a lower price tag.
THIS is why we are only seeing a "measly" 30% increase, once the drivers are ready and optimized the improvements will be noticeable
Last edited by z0phi3l on 04 Jan 2008 - 18:37
Last edited by carmatic on 05 Jan 2008 - 00:52
well said
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.